100 Comments
User's avatar
MRK's avatar

They can be relied on for that, when a court case doesn't present immediate advantage to the right and/or the right hasn't been pushing loudly for a particular outcome.

Expand full comment
PhoenixDogLover's avatar

I would be fine with that, too.

The only hitch is that the laptop would be inadmissible as evidence as it has been in too many hands.

Expand full comment
MRK's avatar

That will be a problem for them, yes.

Expand full comment
Stulexington's avatar

I remember hearing about a situation closer to the book where a bunch of kids washed up on an inland. They apparently did okay as well, the older kids took on leadership positions and got everyone sheltered and fed until they were rescued.

Expand full comment
PrimerGray's avatar

Oh man, 225 more elections every two years with 100 or more seats filled possibly with clones of Gaetz, Jordan, MTG, Boebert, Massie, Higgins, Gosar.....

Expand full comment
MRK's avatar

Turns out Lord of the Flies works better as satire of a particular society and school system than a blueprint for how people actually behave in survival situations.

Expand full comment
freakishlyterrified's avatar

The reason we are a democracy in twilight, and on the verge of destroying ourselves. Right up there. Fuck Murdoch.

Expand full comment
brandodell's avatar

Which is a very dumb rule, but I recall right wingers gleefully citing it when Trump was POTUS.

Expand full comment
Skeptikal KC's avatar

Pffft!

Rethuglicons have no standards.

Expand full comment
brandodell's avatar

That's where all those "apocalypse" movies and TV shows get things wrong. They assume the first thing we do is turn into marauding bands of killers (it does make better cinema, I guess) but in reality small groups tend to easily form communities and band together.

Expand full comment
brandodell's avatar

The only way to reduce the numbers of extremists is to ensure the districts are drawn with enough partisan balance that nominating an extremist risks losing the seat.

Expand full comment
susan_g's avatar

That last paragraph says it all. They'll get away with it.

Expand full comment
Skeptikal KC's avatar

Rethuglicons moonlight as cartographers.

Expand full comment
Walter Wellstone's avatar

This is what I call “fencing in,” and it’s a more refined form of gerrymandering. Instead of breaking up Democratic-leaning areas into safe Republican-leaning districts, just fence Democrats into a single macro district. That way, they get a seat and shut the fuck up, they don’t have a chance of flipping any Republican seat, and you can parcel out the red districts into as many as you want. Alabama here has 1 blue district and 7 red districts. What matters is the ratio once you get to the House. They did the same in TX around Austin. They killed a district that was starting to lean blue (my friend Donna Imam almost won the seat in 2018,) and fenced Democrats into Lloyd Doggett’s district. This gives voters the impression that their vote counts (your guy wins every time,) but that voice is drowned in the sea of red that surrounds your fenced-in district. They’re treating blue districts as holding pens, like with cattle.

Expand full comment
PrimerGray's avatar

Oh, I'm with you. I live in a state with 400 reps for 1.3 M people. My district has 3 reps, each rep in the state represents about 3300 people. Right now it's 201R-199D after the Ds made huge gains in the last election, thus all the crazy shit the Rs would have passed last year is tabled. Extremists were reduced by the voters but it would work this way at the federal level so your idea makes good sense.

Expand full comment
TootsStansbury 🇺🇦's avatar

Republicans cynical and underhanded? Oh my stars.

Expand full comment